PuSH - Publication Server of Helmholtz Zentrum München: Applying synergy metrics to combination screening data: Agreements, disagreements and pitfalls.

Information

Clues to quality of journals

Open Access Policy of Helmholtz Association 2016

CC Licencences

Publication Metrics

Navigation

Home

Deutsch

EVA: Electronic Publishing

New EVA Application

Research

Advanced Search

Browse by ...

... HMGU-Authors/Consortia

... Organizational Structure

... Journal

... Publication Type

... Research Data

... Arbeitsgruppen

... Publication Year

Publication overview

Statistics

Statistics (last 5 years)

OA Publications

Publish

Submit Publication

Import publication from...

...EVA

Report missing publication

Highlights

Support & Contact

Contact persons

Help

Data protection

Helmholtz Open Science

JANE Journal Estimator

SHERPA/RoMEO

DOAJ

Export:

Text

Endnote (RIS) BIB

BibTeX

Vlot, A.H.C.* ; Aniceto, N.* ; Menden, M.P. ; Ulrich-Merzenich, G.* ; Bender, A.*

Applying synergy metrics to combination screening data: Agreements, disagreements and pitfalls.

Drug Discov. Today 24, 2286-2298 (2019)

Postprint

DOI

	Open Access Green

Abstract
Metrics
Extra information

Synergistic drug combinations are commonly sought to overcome monotherapy resistance in cancer treatment. To identify such combinations, high-throughput cancer cell line combination screens are performed; and synergy is quantified using competing models based on fundamentally different assumptions. Here, we compare the behaviour of four synergy models, namely Loewe additivity, Bliss independence, highest single agent and zero interaction potency, using the Merck oncology combination screen. We evaluate agreements and disagreements between the models and investigate putative artefacts of each model's assumptions. Despite at least moderate concordance between scores (Pearson's r >0.32, Spearman's rho > 0.34), multiple instances of strong disagreement were observed. Those disagreements are driven by, among others, large differences in tested concentrations, maximum response values and median effective concentrations.

Impact Factor

Scopus SNIP

Web of Science
Times Cited

Scopus
Cited By

Altmetric

6.880

1.923